Purpose The paper examines the role of abductive reasoning in the construction of social indicators and in the evaluation of policy effectiveness. It addresses the conceptual and inferential processes through which policy problems are framed and translated into indicators, with particular attention to complex social and health policy contexts. Design/methodology/approach The study adopts a theoretical and conceptual approach. It revisits abductive reasoning as an epistemological logic and explores its relevance for policy evaluation. Drawing on literature from sociology, policy analysis, and social indicator research, the paper reconstructs the denotative and connotative procedures that precede indicator operationalization. Findings The analysis shows that abductive reasoning plays a key role in clarifying how policy problems are framed and which aspects of social phenomena can be meaningfully measured. By linking problem framing, indicator construction, and evaluative judgment, an abductive perspective supports a more coherent interpretation of policy effectiveness and highlights the contextual and interpretive dimensions embedded in social indicators. Research limitations/implications The paper is conceptual in nature. It suggests that abductive reasoning can inform the design and interpretation of indicators in policy evaluation, particularly in settings characterized by uncertainty, plural meanings, and heterogeneous social conditions. Future research may further explore how this perspective is applied in specific evaluative contexts. Originality/value The paper aims to contribute to debates on social indicators and policy evaluation by explicitly articulating abductive reasoning as a guiding logic for indicator construction. It proposes a conceptual framework that links problem framing, denotative and connotative dimensions and evaluative judgment, thereby clarifying the epistemological assumptions behind assessments of policy effectiveness.
Eleonora Venneri (Wed,) studied this question.